City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. Lafayette Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. Lafayette Holding Corp.

259 A.D. 108, 18 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6058

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 108 (City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. Lafayette Holding Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. Lafayette Holding Corp., 259 A.D. 108, 18 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6058 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

There is ample evidence in the record to sustain the award as a deficiency judgment. While we do not believe that the amount the grantee paid for the conveyance to him in blank can be relied upon as a basis of computation of the value of the property, still, the motives which prompted the transfer [109]*109may properly be considered. It is difficult to imagine that the defendant Hawkins would have conveyed the property to a stranger, if it had a value greatly in excess of the mortgage.

Testimony concerning all necessary elements as outlined in Heiman v. Bishop (272 N. Y. 83) can be found in the record. We are constrained to the view that the judgment, as entered, fairly reflects the damage which was suffered by the mortgagee. Consequently, tbe order and judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Present — O’Malley, Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.j Dore, J., dissents and votes to reverse.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

There is ample evidence in the record to sustain the award as a deficiency judgment. While we do not believe that the amount the grantee paid for the conveyance to him in blank can be relied upon as a basis of computation of the value of the property, still, the motives which prompted the transfer [109]*109may properly be considered. It is difficult to imagine that the defendant Hawkins would have conveyed the property to a stranger, if it had a value greatly in excess of the mortgage.

Testimony concerning all necessary elements as outlined in Heiman v. Bishop (272 N. Y. 83) can be found in the record. We are constrained to the view that the judgment, as entered, fairly reflects the damage which was suffered by the mortgagee. Consequently, tbe order and judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Present — O’Malley, Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.j Dore, J., dissents and votes to reverse.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 108, 18 N.Y.S.2d 261, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-bank-farmers-trust-co-v-lafayette-holding-corp-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack